Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Pretty interesting...especially considering election season. Some fast facts for those of you that don't know:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 3856.story
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/10/us/illino ... index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/10/ch ... rict-fail/

-Rahm Emanuel is the Mayor of Chicago, and basically Obama's BFF
-The city (ironically has been run by Democrats solidly for years and years), is now bankrupt...hence the center of this Teacher's deal controversy.
-The Teachers Union hates Rahm Emanuel

------------------------------

This is interesting for me personally as many of my GFs friends are CPS teachers...and I've been hearing them complain about it for a few weeks now. The biggest issues:

1. Rahm wants longer school days
2. Rahm wants Merit-based pay based on student performance / teacher evaluations
3. Rahm wants to end "you got this degree, so now you get this raise" -- making it more like a business where performance/outcomes are rewarded
4. Rahm wants more funding for charter schools (which have had higher success rates...watch the documentary "The Lottery" for more info)

The teachers union obviously hates all of those things...and also wants:

1. Class size caps...they want to cap them at 25-30 students...Rahm doesn't want to do that. Some say they have classes as large as 60 kids. --- This makes sense to me, smaller classes = better
2. They want to keep all of their benefits / pay scales / etc. (to be clear, the average CPS worker makes close to $100,000 a year including benefits)
3. They don't want principals to be able to fire teachers

It's a really tough situation...now we have issues with a bunch of students not in school due to the strike. I respect that Rahm doesn't want to raise taxes by some absurd amount to meet teacher demands, but I also acknowledge that teaching inner city youth is incredibly difficult.....blaming teachers for the fact that 75% of Chicago Public 8th graders are below reading level is only half the issue...they are dealing with social and economic barriers that certainly play into it.

At the same time...knowing what some of these teachers make...knowing that many cannot be fired...knowing how insolvent the public school system is financially...I can see where Rahm (again, huge Obama guy, which is ironic that he's advocating some "conservative" ideas) is coming from.

I think the government will cave though, tax increases will happen. And the wealth will continue to leave the city as people getting hit with taxes decide to move to the suburbs where at least the schools are good. I know I'll be living in the suburbs some day too.

The worst thing is that the kids now aren't even getting any education while the teachers strike.

Surprisingly, you nailed most of the issues.

Yes, merit-based pay makes no sense for teachers, especially not inner-city teachers. You might say that these teachers should consider themselves lucky to even have jobs, but the reality is that teaching is demanding and unpleasant and you get what you pay for. It is important for many reasons that teachers be paid well (but not too well).

Charter schools are bad for three reasons:
1. Their performance is a scam It's easy to be successful when you can choose your own targets instead of having them chosen for you. Public schools don't get to choose who they educate or how; charter schools do.

2. Charter schools are also a threat to social cohesion: having groups of people divided from such an early age will have serious social ramifications and increases the risk of blockbusting, class warfare and ultimately social meltdown.

3. Charter schools are yet another case of private interests trying to get paid out of the public fund, turning public debt into profit. If that public debt did not exist then neither would their profits. No different than military towns that bawl about the impact of base closures on their so-called economy.

Allowing principals to fire teachers at discretion invites discrimination and a culture of cowardice. It is important that teachers be able to express their opinions and make decisions on grading and curriculum without fear of reprisal.

You do identify the core of the issue: social barriers. No school or policy can make up for shitty parents.

So how do we fix that?

I think the final answer is public works. Employing inner-city people in public works, building roads, mass transit, recreation facilities, small industry, and civil improvement will have short- and long-term benefits. Higher employment strengthens the family unit. When men are employed, children enjoy a more stable life, and become better students. Neighborhoods that are kept clean, have good mass transit, and have regular police patrols can harbor stores and small industry, allowing for further growth.

It is also important to build recreation facilities, so that children and adults are kept off the street and are allowed to build social bonds in a well-adjusted environment, making them manageable citizens. Children and adults who recreate at a skate park or arcade are going to be more manageable in the classroom than those wandering the streets, who turn to sex, crime, drugs and street fighting to alleviate their boredom.

How do we pay for that?

The answer boils down to currency, trade and taxation. So long as cheap imports flow in from China, and the big winners in this economy go untaxed, this country's labor will be undervalued and our economy will be stuck in Japanese stagnation. The rich must pay more and the spigot of cheap goods from China must be shut off. Only then can labor be properly valued and the necessary community investment be made.

Taking this issue in isolation, however - setting aside national and international issues beyond their control - the proper approach is probably a compromise. Kill charter schools, definitely, so that everyone is in the same boat and must help row. There must be some combination of tax increases, floated debt, and the teacher's union will no doubt have to accept lower pay than they would prefer. The rest of the so-called reforms, trying to run a school as if it's a business (hint: its not) should get chucked. It's more likely, however, they'll make a lot of bad decisions.

What do you think, Azelma?

EDIT: Reading the article closely, this is not about teacher pay. This is about hire-and-fire. This is about power, not money. Basically it looks to me like Rahm's friends want to consolidate their grasp on the school system.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.